About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
there are people that argue having annual deficit that are almost as big as the federal budget when bill clinton was president is not really a problem. there are people argue having a public held debt be a majority of our economy is not really a problem. there are people who argue that the gross federal debt consuming our entire economy being bigger than our entire economy isn't a problem. and then you have the unfunded liability of the major entitlement program like social security and medicare which are larger by some measures than the world economy. but that's not a problem. and there are usually two arguments that people make to this effect. i try address them in "devouring freedom: can big government ever be stopped?." one is trust us, we're the government. we'll know what to do before the crisis comes. the other it's will a sucker born every minute. people will keep buying the treasury bonds, interest rates will never return to where they were before the financial crisis. the economy at some point will recampaign some semblance of normal growth and everything will be fine. there's no nothi
deficit at or close to $1 trillion for five straight years. millions of americans are out of work or living in poverty. the highest rates we have seen in a generation. the administration's response seems to be more of the same. more spending higher taxes and record debt. what we can't keep spending money we don't have. we need a new approach. we need an approach that encourages economic growth. the longer we delay fundamental reform. the longer we delay a real recovery. our national debt is weighing down our country like an anchor. it's weighing down our economy. it's making it harder for us to get ahead. the administration claims that if we approve the budget we'll have reduced deficit by 4.3 trillion. this is not true. i want to break it down and they'll show me how. the administration said we reduced deficit by police $2.6. the president is responsible for all the policy enacted before when he was in office for the first two years. if you add back the money for the stimlis, the payroll tax holiday, the 24% increase in domestic spend. total deficit reduction when you net it out
the nation, fiscal deficits cut three percentage gdp became more indebted. similarly per world countries, difficult to turn themselves around. fiscal surpluses. the country in particular the one that really, in 2008 to baggage in the coming out of this record new, two dozen seven, experiencing developing commodity prices. the finance minister, to spend and give it back to the people. resisted the pressure. they said to know, this money is for a rainy day. kent, of course, you know the rest of the story, the financial crisis. the deaths of the financial crisis, billions of dollars that allowed it to have a $4 billion tax growth. that is exactly. fiscal policy. hanson grasshoppers. that is discipline. clarity. the clarity, want to tell you the story. not jamaica, but the tiny elephant. in 1992 barbados faced an enormous financial interest, a potential financial crisis. the u.s., heavily dependent. the exports the rest of the world. in barbados dementia national monetary fund. barbados had what's cled a face to exchange is case the billion dollars. the country command the same way the value
to find a bipartisan way to reduce the deficit. thus far, it hasn't worked. we've reduced the debt by doing a number of different things, some $2.5 trillion worth. we've cooperated in that regard. the deep cuts required though by the sequester have failed to bring the republicans to the negotiating table to find more savings or more revenue. even after both the house and senate passed budget resolutions, the house republican leadership has refused to go to conference to work out our differences. republicans have been telling us for a long time that they wanted regular order. and we come to regular order, they don't want regular order. republicans are afraid to even be seen considering a compromise with democrats. and i speak more strongly that the republicans here in the senate are doing their objection here on going to conference more to protect the house because that applies so much more to the house republicans than it does the republicans over here. the republicans over there are afraid to be even seen considering a compromise with us. because republicans have refused to negoti
aancedproach to deficit reduction and strengthen the middle class. as i said, last week our focus in the next little while will be on guns and budget, talked about budget. i will be joined by my colleague, congressman mike thompson of california. congressman thompson is a vietnam vet, a wounded vietnam vet. he is a gun owner, hunter. is the head of our task force on gun violence prevention, and he is a co-author of the bipartisan bill in the house with peter king. to put forth a manchin-toomey compromise that failed, so sadly, in the senate last night. we are so disappointed. our sorrow was expressed so appropriately by president obama last night that i invited mike to join us here to tell you where we go from here and to answer the question that people are saying what can we do to change this. mike, would you speak -- thank you for your leadership. >> thank you, leader pelosi. it's a pleasure and honor to join you, to talk about and to answer any questions that you guys may have on gun violence prevention. -manchin amendment that failefailed last night, as i thk everybody knows. it was every
forward a comprehensive balanced approach to deficit reduction to eliminate the sequester, but this is congress' responsibility. it needs to take action. >> there is a couple of bipartisan group of senators making proposals. senators says the administration has the right to prioritize spending, and the senator suggesting the furloughs are postponed to give congress another chance to revisit sequesteration, other senators, republican and democrat, asking the transportation secretary and head of the faa if they might be able toe move money around. what's your response? >> well, a couple things. one, i think the fact that various lawmakers suggest remedies confirms what i said, which is only taking action to the result of the sequester that republicans insisted take place, but let's be clear about the faa cannot take because of the way the budgets are structured and the way the law imposing the sequester is written. they are required by law to cut about 1 billion dollars between now and end of the september. that's 637 million from the faa. the faa initiated a series of cost
-called grand bargain we could devise a balance deficit reduction package for one year that avoids sequestration in fy 2014. we simply cannot continue to ignore the effect of sequestration. sequestration will have a major impact on military personnel. though the pay of military personnel has been exempted, the sequester would reduce military readiness in the services for the troops including schools for military children, family support programs and transition assistance programs and mental health and other counseling programs. the president's budget request continues a major drawdown of active duty and reserve strength. we have in recent years given the department numinous force shaping authorities to allow it to reduce its strength in a responsible way ensuring that the services maintain the proper force mix and avoiding grade and occupational disparities, all of which have long term affect. if sequestration continues, the result would be ore pripitous foe structe that is ou of t the requirements of our defense strategy. sequestration has already affected military readiness. we have heard test
-inflicted wounds without adding one penny to the deficit. we've provided money, the money is there, we haven't spent it, we don't need to. we can use the savings from wrapping up two wars to avoid the full brunt of the sequester's arbitrary cuts. the congressional budget office said that would score; that money is available, it is money we could use. funding for the operation in ir a afgan has in alled overseas contin yeype account. since the worst of the seq cuts are creating an emergency situation, we should consider using thighs funds to offset their impact. these really are emergencies and we should do it. i am not proposing we use them to offset the entire sequester but congress has the power to avert the most painful sequester cuts using these mexico. 28 republicans in the senate and 174 republicans in the house would impose these sequester haphazard cuts. if those same republicans work with democrats, we could act to protect families and businesses and ensure our national defense and save millions of americans hours waiting at the airport. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presi
today to address three issues. number one, the economic deficit of less skilled immigration. the u.s. work force is changing american family is having fewer children and birthrates are now well below levels. 10,000 baby boomers are retiring every day. and the lush and her workers coming behind them are much more educated than their parents. in 196064% of american workers were high-school dropouts. today the number is less than 10%. together these three factors have had a dramatic effect on the pool of americans available to fill low-skill jobs. it is no accident that my members are constantly complaining about the difficulty finding workers. the pool have to draw on a shrinking. for those seeking higher, unskilled man of prime working age the supply of u.s. workers is literally half the size it was in 1970. if a thing, demand is growing. in $0.195,525 of every dollar spent on food was spent in a restaurant. today it is $0.50. one of the fastest growing occupations in america is some help aid. many less skilled immigrant workers and only then increasingly in years ahead. aside from
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9